- (1.) THESE two appeals arise out of the same judgment of the learned Tribunal being dated 7.12.2000. Appeal No. 68/2002 was admitted by this Court on 21.3.2007 by framing following two substantial questions of law: (1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, when the search at the premises of Ajeet Bhawan took place in December 1987 and the declaration filed by Mr. Swarup Singh and Mr. Sobhag Singh that the jewellery found at the time of search even if accepted to be their undisclosed 2 income, the family arrangement which has been alleged to have taken place thereafter on 5.4.88, subsequent to search, could be discarded on the ground of the declaration made by Sh. Swarup Singh and Mr. Sobhag Singh in respect of status as on the date of search. (2) Whether in the present case even if the claim of the assessee about the jewellery found during search to be ancestral is discarded, on sale of such jewellery, whole of receipt can be considered as income during relevant previous year could be considered from undisclosed sources not exigible to tax as capital gains.
(2.) THIS Court, vide order dated 27.9.2001, in Appeal No. 68/2002 (as it then was, Appeal No. DR(J) 1763/2001), ordered to connect it with Appeal No. 41/2001. However, by order dated 15.7.2002, passed in both the appeals, show cause notices were ordered to be issued. Then on 29.1.2003, both the matters were heard for admission. However, the matter was adjourned. Thereafter, vide order dated 16.3.2007, the matter was ordered by Hon'ble the Chief Justice to be listed before the regular Bench. This order was passed in Appeal No. 68/2002. However, no such order could be passed in Appeal No. 41/2001, as the last order -sheet is dated 22.11.2005, to the effect, that appropriate orders be sought from the Hon'ble Chief Justice, in this regard. Thus, the Appeal No. 68/2002 came to be admitted after the aforesaid order from the Hon'ble Chief Justice, on 21.3.2007, as mentioned above. However, despite being connected matter, it appears, that simply for want of separate express order from 3 Hon'ble the Chief Justice, this Appeal No. 41/2001 did not come to be listed. It is in this background, that when Appeal No. 68/2002 came up for hearing on 4.3.2008, we directed that to be listed alongwith Appeal No. 41/2001, and it is thereupon, that the above facts have come to notice. In these circumstances, we feel it appropriate, to treat the order passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, in the Appeal No. 68/2002, on 16.3.2007, to be applicable to Appeal No. 41/2001 also, and accordingly instead of standing to ceremonies, we admit Appeal No. 41/2001 also, by framing same two substantial questions of law, as have been framed in Appeal No. 68/2002, vide order dated 21.3.2007. Obviously, Mr. Bissa appears for the respondents, as such, formal issuance of notice is also not necessary. This is how the two appeals arise out of the common judgment, and involve common substantial questions of law, and are being decided by this common order.
(3.) THE necessary facts, in very brief are, that a Search was conducted in the premises of Shri Sobhag Singh and Swarup Singh and other family members of the assessee in December 1987, in which, certain valuables were found, and seized. Then we are told, that on certain conditions, the valuables were released, and 4 there after a family arrangement is said to have been entered into between different family members, distributing the valuables in accordance with different schedules, appended to such family arrangement. Thereafter, the assessee is alleged to have sold certain articles, which, according to assessee, fell to his share, under the family arrangement, and accordingly, the assessee submitted return, declaring the long term capital gain, arising out of sale of such valuables.;